Media give pass to the Obama they favor, and fear

By: Douglas MacKinnon, OpEd Contributor- | 5/27/09 5:59 PM

With President Obama’s choice of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to replace David Souter on the Supreme Court sure to elicit the predictable fawning praise from the majority of the mainstream media, an important question needs to be asked: Is the mainstream media lauding and giving a pass to the president because they agree with him, or because they fear him? There is mounting evidence that it may be a bit of both.

Earlier this month, The Hollywood Reporter referred to the fear. While discussing the fact that the networks were “seething” behind the scenes at the prime-time Obama press conferences that cost them millions, the magazine said no network official wanted to be quoted by name, “fearing repercussions from the administration.”

“If the president wants to make it tough for your network, he can,” said one such executive. Another said, “Nobody wants to take on the White House, so we’ll have to tiptoe through this.”

Gee, if memory serves, network executives did not exhibit such a fear of retribution when George W. Bush occupied the White House.

But, maybe the network executives are right to fear this new president and what he can do to them or the bottom line of their companies. The evidence is there for all to see.

While our sacred Constitution grants him no such authority, Obama has had no trouble firing the head of General Motors, rewarding union “activists” with control of Chrysler, unilaterally forcing health care executives to forego $2 trillion (with a “T) in future revenue, implicitly telling Citigroup and Bank of America that they must fire their CEO’s, and blackmail, extort, or threaten the state of California that unless it restores wage cuts to a union, he will rescind billions in already granted stimulus money.

Four months into his presidency and Obama has removed all doubt that he is the most “activist” president of our lifetimes. He is an activist president who demonstrates his leftist leanings with almost every action and non-action.

One such non-action being his decision not to reject or correct America-bashing strongmen Hugo Chavez or Daniel Ortega at last month’s Summit of the Americas. Why? Because in a number of ways, Obama - like many in the mainstream media - empathizes with the socialist anti-capitalistic philosophy espoused by Chavez and Ortega.

While the mainstream media gushes over their chosen leader, it would behoove those not under the Obama spell to coldly and quickly look at the facts. Obama has skillfully and repeatedly said words he thinks the nation wants to hear. But behind the curtain, he is pushing every button and pulling every lever that will accelerate his brand of socialism down the tracks.

To my Venezuelan-born wife, Obama’s words, deeds and threats elicit memories of the leader of her former and failing country. Presidential “activism” by Chavez has brought Venezuela to ruin, while exponentially increasing the suffering of her people.

What is most amazing in all of this is that Obama’s aides make little effort to hide his agenda. When asked about the White House further engineering the makeup of U.S. companies, press spokesman Robert Gibbs said, “In terms of management changes, obviously in both the case of financial institutions and in the case of auto companies, the government has…weighed in on changes at the CEO level and at the board of directors level…we’ll have to wait and see what these individual tests bring.”

Big media has announced its love and fear of this “activist” president. Maybe it’s time for the rest of us to pay much more attention to what’s going on in this White House.

Douglas MacKinnon is a former White House and Pentagon official and author of the novel, “The Apocalypse Directive.”

No Mr. Gibbs,

The so called birth certificate on the web was a forgery. Another a temp by Usurper team to try to cover up and more lies to come.. I would have ask a follow up question. OK since you said his birth certificate was on the web, right? Did you know it was proven to be a fraud or do you want to know? Why has the USURPER spent over 1 million dollars in lawyer fees to keep all his records covered up. Also what about all the cases filed in courts across America that charge him with Treason and fraud. One more question Mr. puppet oh I mean Gibbs, Why did the USURPER meet behind close door with Biden and the Supreme Court Judges? Also behind close doors without media coverage ? Don’t you know that is illegal?

When asked by WorldNetDaily.com White House correspondent Les Kinsolving why Obama, who has pledged transparency in his administration, would not release his long-form birth certificate to establish his constitutional eligibility for office, spokesman Robert Gibbels, employing Alinsky's Rule 5, guffawed in unison with members of the Washington press corps, about the concerns of 400,000 petitioners who have demanded it.

"Are you looking for the president's birth certificate?" he asked incredulously. "Lester, this question in many ways continues to astound me. The state of Hawaii provided a copy with the seal of the president's birth. I know there are apparently at least 400,000 people -- (laughter) -- that continue to doubt the existence of and the certification by the state of Hawaii of the president's birth there, but it's on the Internet because we put it on the Internet for each of those 400,000 to download. I certainly hope by the fourth year of our administration that we'll have dealt with this burgeoning birth controversy."

It was the first time any member of the press corps has publicly asked a member of the administration a question directly related to Obama's constitutional eligibility for office as a "natural born citizen."

Gibbels continues the lie that Obama released his birth certificate. It's a damnable lie. Obama has never released his birth certificate and Gibbels and the rest of the White House staff knows it.

There are actually 3 lies in Gibbels statement:

1. The State of Hawaii has never provided a copy of Obama's birth certificate -- with or without a state seal -- never.

2. The State of Hawaii has never certified Obama was born in Hawaii -- never.

3. There is no Obama birth certificate on the Internet -- none.

Now you know why I refer to Gibbs as Gibbels. He's Obama's propagandist.

Go here for the background on Obama's bogus birth records, and here for the law behind the eligibility question.

Could you please let me know who was the doctor that attending Obama's mother when he was born at your hospital, and publish an image of the original letter below since this one is not an image.

Hundreds of web pages and blogs are asking the question for a prove of his birth place. It seams to me you have the answer when you are taking for granted he was born there, without any other related and important information.

Could you verify on you web page he was born there? and give full details.

Read a very special congratulatory message sent by President Barack Obama and read by Representative Neil Abercrombie.

January 24, 2009

Kapi`olani Medical Center

Dear Friends,

I am writing to share congratulations on the centennial celebration of the Kapi`olani Medical Center for Women & Children.

Kapi`olani was one of Hawai`i's earliest hospitals, and it has served many generations of Hawai`i's people with distinction. The Medical Center reaches out to children of all backgrounds, and treats more than 62,000 children per year. As a beneficiary of the excellence of Kapi`olani Medical Center - the place of my birth - I am pleased to add my voice to your chorus of supporters.

Hawai`i has always been a home to me, and I'm pleased to take part in your celebration. Thank you for your hard work, and I wish you all the best for the next one hundred years.

A bill approved by the House of Representatives and referred to the Senate would prohibit federal employees of executive branch from being compelled to release any document unless a court makes a specified determination by a preponderance of evidence -- legislation at least one group suspects is designed to protect Barack Obama's elusive birth certificate from release.

Sovereignty Alliance has issued a "red alert" about the bill it calls "stealth legislation ... to protect Obama from providing his birth certificate."

"It wouldn't surprise me a bit if this were one of the intended consequences of this legislation," said Joseph Farah, who last week initiated a national billboard campaign to bring attention to the issue of Obama's missing birth certificate and what it might say about his claim to be a "natural born citizen," a status necessary to serving in the White House.

"In any case, this bill puts the lie to this administration and this Congress being the most ethical and transparent in American history," Farah said. "They're very open when it comes to the secrets of previous administrations, but when it comes to their own work, it is shrouded in secrecy. Even Obama's birth certificate and student records are well-guarded state secrets."

An attorney handling one of the many lawsuits challenging Barack Obama's eligibility to occupy the Oval Office is urging a court to deny a demand from a lawyer for the president for still more time to answer simple questions such as whether Obama was born in Hawaii, citing the dangers of having an president many identify as a "usurper" in office.

"Whether or not the president of the United States is eligible for the office he currently occupies is of utmost national important," wrote attorney Mario Apuzzo of New Jersey in a motion opposing Obama's request for more time.

"Every passing day Mr. Obama takes executive action, that significantly impacts on the lives of Americans," he continued.

"It can be argued that Mr. Obama is currently the most powerful human being on the planet. He could conceivably end all life on earth in a single day. Every executive action that Mr. Obama takes impacts not only the plaintiffs but also every other American," he said in the legal document submitted in the court caseyesterday.

Apuzzo told WND that while it may be good strategy on the part of a defense lawyer for Obama to delay answering such questions as long as possible, the American people also are impacted by the case every day in which there is not a resolution.

He outlines in the document that while ordinary court rules require answers to such lawsuits within 60 days, in this case the actions of the defense lawyer probably will generate a delay of 124 days – or more – for Obama's answers.

Apuzzo told WND the first issue is simple: Was Obama born in Hawaii as he has said? The second question seeking a definition of "natural born" citizen is more complicated.

WND reported earlier on the request submitted by Ralph Marra Jr., the acting U.S. attorney, and Elizabeth Pascal, the assistant U.S. attorney in New Jersey, that explains that the Department of Justice, operating under Obama appointee Attorney General Eric Holder, still is working on a decision on representation for the defendants.

"The failure to file an answer, move, or to otherwise respond before the expiration of the time specified is not the result of any neglect on any of the Defendants' parts," the court filing said.

"Representation decisions are made by a specialized group of individuals in the Department of Justice in Washington, D.C. In order to provide a fair opportunity for the Department to review this matter and to complete the representation determinations, Defendants respectfully request an extension of twenty (20) days from the date of this Order in which to answer, move, or otherwise respond," the court filing said.

WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama's status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."

Some of the lawsuits question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama's American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

Further, others question his citizenship by virtue of his attendance in Indonesian schools during his childhood and question on what passport did he travel to Pakistan three decades ago.

Adding fuel to the fire is Obama's persistent refusal to release documents that could provide answers and the appointment of myriad lawyers to defend against all requests for his documentation. While his supporters cite an online version of a "Certification of Live Birth" from Hawaii as his birth verification, critics point out such documents actually were issued for children not born in the state.

The ultimate questions remain unaddressed to date: Is Obama a natural born citizen, and, if so, why hasn't documentation been provided? And, of course, if he is not, what does it mean to the 2008 election or the U.S. Constitution if it is revealed that there has been a violation?

And the answer could take only minutes: authorization from the president to Hawaiian officials to release his documentation.

Apuzzo, on his website, says the issue "is of utmost national importance."

It is not the first case challenging Obama's eligibility that has run into a stone wall in the court system. A similar situation developed in a California case raising a challenge to Obama's eligibility that was filed on behalf of Ambassador Alan Keyes. The complaint was filed by Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation in early November, but it didn't get court action until March, months after the actual election that it challenged.

That case now is on appeal.

The case being handled by Apuzzo focuses on the alleged failure in Congress to follow the Constitution.

That document, the lawsuit states, "provides that Congress must fully qualify the candidate 'elected' by the Electoral College Electors."

It provides, the lawsuit said, "If the president-elect shall have failed to qualify, then the vice president elect shall act as president until a president shall have qualified."

"There existed significant public doubt and grievances from plaintiffs and other concerned Americans regarding Obama's eligibility to be president and defendants had the sworn duty to protect and preserve the Constitution and specifically under the 20th Amendment, Section 3, a Constitutional obligation to confirm whether Obama, once the electors elected him, was qualified," the case explains.

"Congress is the elected representative of the American people and the people speak and act through them," the lawsuit said.

The defendants "violated" the 20th Amendment by failing to assure that Obama meets the eligibility requirements," the lawsuit said.

A state official, Hawaiian Health Director Chiyome Fukino, said, "I, and Dr. Alvin Onaka have personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Sen. Obama's original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures." But officials have rejected requests for access, saying Obama would have to authorize any access, and left ambiguous its origin: Does the certificate on file with the Department of Health indicate a Hawaii birth or was it generated after the Obama family registered a foreign birth in Hawaii?

Obama's half-sister, Maya Soetoro, has named two different Hawaii hospitals where Obama could have been born.

While an Obama spokesman one time called the allegations "garbage," the president and his team have withheld other comments. But here is a partial listing and status update for some of the cases over Obama's eligibility:

New Jersey attorney Mario Apuzzo has filed a case on behalf of Charles Kerchner and others alleging Congress didn't properly ascertain that Obama is qualified to hold the office of president.

Pennsylvania Democrat Philip Berg has three cases pending, including Berg vs. Obama in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, a separate Berg vs. Obama which is under seal at the U.S. District Court level and Hollister vs. Soetoro a/k/a Obama, (now dismissed) brought on behalf of a retired military member who could be facing recall to active duty by Obama.

Leo Donofrio of New Jersey filed a lawsuit claiming Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court but denied a full hearing.

Cort Wrotnowski filed suit against Connecticut's secretary of state, making a similar argument to Donofrio. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court, but was denied a full hearing.

Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan sought a temporary restraining order to stop the Electoral College vote in North Carolina until Barack Obama's eligibility could be confirmed, alleging doubt about Obama's citizenship. His case was denied.

In Ohio, David M. Neal sued to force the secretary of state to request documents from the Federal Elections Commission, the Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and Obama to show the presidential candidate was born in Hawaii. The case was denied.

Also in Ohio, there was the Greenberg v. Brunner case which ended when the judge threatened to assess all case costs against the plaintiff.

In Washington state, Steven Marquis sued the secretary of state seeking a determination on Obama's citizenship. The case was denied.

In Georgia, Rev. Tom Terry asked the state Supreme Court to authenticate Obama's birth certificate. His request for an injunction against Georgia's secretary of state was denied by Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter.

California attorney Orly Taitz has brought a case, Lightfoot vs. Bowen, on behalf of Gail Lightfoot, the vice presidential candidate on the ballot with Ron Paul, four electors and two registered voters. She also has brought forward several other cases and has conducted several public campaigns to generate awareness of the issue.

Monday, May 18, 2009

Activity in Kerchner et al v Obama & Congress et al Lawsuit - On 18 May 2009 I filed a Declaration Opposing Defendants' Motion to Extend Time to Answer or Otherwise Move as to the Amended Complaint Returnable June 1, 2009. The defendants have already had almost three months to answer, move, or otherwise respond. Regular citizen defendants get 20 days. The government normally gets 60 days. They have already had almost 90 days. What they are asking for would get them to over 120 days before having to answer or otherwise move. In our opinion, they have had an adequate amount of time to answer or move or other wise respond. Thus I have filed our opposition to any further extensions of time to answer or otherwise move on this case. More on that in a subsequent post.

[email protected]Berg states the Obama’s give Commencement Addresses but fail to be honest with the graduates about who they really are.Barack Obama is really Barry Soetoro, an illegal alien, an Usurper who is Constitutionally “ineligible” to be President of the United States.Michelle Obama is a “disbarred” attorney in Illinois – how and why ?Why does the public not know the backgrounds of the phonies in the White House ?Obama is the biggest “HOAX” against the United States in over 230 years !

Time to e-mail !

(Lafayette Hill, PA – 05/17/2009) -Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the first Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama challenging Senator Obama's lack of Constitutional "qualifications/eligibility" to serve as President of the United States and has three [3] cases that are still pending in the Federal Court system, Berg vs. Obama [2 cases – 1 under seal] and Hollister vs. Soetoro a/k/a Obama, et al, announced today that he is asking everyone to e-mail the messages below to DEMAND THE OBAMA’S to release the “truth” about their backgrounds.

The purpose of our President is to protect our Country, the U.S.A. and “We The People”, not to leave us with doubts and fears. If “We The People” and our Country, the United States of America, are important to Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack H. Obama, he would do everything in his power to put all doubts and fears to rest. It is a very easy solution; all he has to do is provide his Constitutional eligibility credentials and records. Yes, transparency and openness as promised by Obama !

Our country is in a financial crisis, BUT WORSE, a “Constitutional Crisis” as Obama is not “Constitutionally eligible/qualified” to be President.

“To Barack Hussein Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro and Michelle Obama: As your administration is to be “open and transparent,” why will you not divulge your backgrounds? I know why. As both of you are addressing graduates of college, you are being dishonest to all of them as you fail to tell them about your backgrounds. What a disgrace !

Because both of you are putting on the biggest “HOAX” in our country in over 230 years.Barack or rather Barry [Soetoro], you know you are an illegal alien, not only “Constitutionally ineligible/unqualified” to be President, but also it was illegal for you to have served as a United States Senator from Illinois for 3 ½ years.

Michelle, just be honest ! You are being honored as First Lady without explaining to the citizens of our country that you were “disbarred” from being an attorney in 1993 – why ? The public has a right to know.

Michelle and Obama, you both know that you are putting forth this great “HOAX,” that is so dangerous to all of us, the people of this great nation.

Reveal yourselves and Obama resign, as President “now” as everything you do is void or voidable. Why are you putting our nation through this turmoil ?

Thank you,Respectfully,

__________________________ [your name]”

For copies of all Press Releases and Court Pleadings, go to:obamacrimes.com

Notre Dame: Scandal! Catholic paradox, absurdity, and shame

May 16, 11:14 AM

8 comments

Father Norman Weslin leads Notre Dame protest

A Catholic priest was arrested and carted off the Notre Dame campus for standing up for the lives of the unborn, and against the betrayal of our Catholic pro-life principles by the administration of the university yesterday (5/15/09).

Father Norman Weslin is a senior citizen and a former army colonel who was arrested along with 20 other so-called radical and undignified pro-life protesters. Ironically, Sunday the one who advances an agenda that is the antithesis of our pro-life Catholic faith will give the commencement address and receive an honorary doctorate of laws on this same campus.

Many at Notre Dame feel that it is hypocritical and contradictory to what the mission of the church and the university is supposed to be to not have the chief executive of our country speak. They say that there is a long history of inviting our new presidents to commencement ceremonies. Some Catholics believe that in the past, both President Jimmy Carter and President Bill Clinton spoke at Notre Dame commencements, receiving honorary degrees. So what's the problem? It's a false argument based on fabrication. Evidence of this typical liberal spinning is conveniently laid out in black and white here: http://www.catholicsfornotredame.org/

Let's examine the absurd introduction together:

On May 17, President Obama will speak at the University of Notre Dame's commencement, a Presidential tradition since the 1950s. In fact, every American President since Dwight D. Eisenhower has spoken at Notre Dame. It's a time to celebrate America's future in a non-partisan way.

"Charlotte Allen, author of “The Human Christ: The Search for the Historical Jesus,” argues that despite the ND’s “tradition” of inviting U.S. presidents, Bill Clinton was never invited. Any one Clinton’s anti-life actions which ought to have properly disqualified him from setting foot on Notre Dame’s South Bend campus “were spread out over the eight years of his presidency. By contrast, Obama has scarcely been president for eight weeks, and already he’s forced U.S. taxpayers to subsidize overseas abortion clinics; announced he’ll rescind a Bush-administration rule allowing health-care workers to refuse to provide services (such as abortion) they deem morally repugnant; and opened the sluice-gates for federal funding of embryo-destructive stem-cell research, all the way up to cloning.”

“If Bill Clinton wasn’t invited to be commencement speaker, why on earth has Obama been issued the implicit endorsement of his views — plus a bully pulpit — by the nation’s premiere Catholic university?,” she concludes." Full article here: http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=15452

Time to celebrate America in a secular way is more accurate. Non-partisan would necessarily include conservative Catholics, who cannot now participate in the celebration due to reason and conscience. Bishop D'Arcy will boycott the Commencement proceedings, Mary Ann Glendon has declined to receive her much deserved Laetare Metal and submitted a letter of explanation available here: http://tinyurl.com/Glendondeclinesmedal

But recently, political activists, operatives, and pundits from the far right have tried to turn this celebration into a political firestorm. Unfortunately, they have been joined to varying degrees by a vocal minority of Catholic bishops. They are calling on Notre Dame to "uninvite" President Obama, and failing that, they've pledged to turn a solemn and joyful commencement ceremony into a political and media circus.

The Commencement ceremonies have indeed been turned into a political firestorm, and a scandal, and a political and media and religious circus--because the Rev. John Jenkins and the Notre Dame administration invited someone who has an historical anti-life record and agenda not for appropriate educational dialogue, but with the intention of awarding him with an honor and to give the 2009 commencement speech.

Some 70 Bishops have gone on the record in opposition to the decision to have the president give the address and receive the honor, but these are in no way to be seen as a minority, ultra-conservative voice. How many Bishops are on record for agreeing with the decision? At last count--zero.

Note, too, that it was only last weekend that Archbishop Raymond Burke, Prefect of the Vatican’s highest court, the Apostolic Signatura, called on Catholics to “give an uncompromising witness” to the dignity of life and sharply criticized the University of Notre Dame for its planned honor for the far left, anti-life speaker. http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/may/09050804.html Therefore, citing the number of our Catholic leadership on record for opposition to the decision is disingenuous.

Furthermore, the USCCB statement in 2004 is very clear: The Catholic community and Catholic institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles. They should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions. http://www.usccb.org/bishops/catholicsinpoliticallife.shtml Our Bishops, in this document, have already spoken to such a serious matter.

While it is true that this is a Catholic policy regarding Catholic politicians, Father Jenkins himself stated that-up until now-Notre Dame has always followed the policy. This year an exception was made, as he admits that he took the liberty to interpret the document as he saw fit for justification of his harmful, defiant actions. http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/apr/09040808.html

What our beloved Pope John Paul II stated leaves no room for doubt that the liberally-educated Notre Dame students are in error, unable to see the truth, and are repeating the typical secular pattern of deception and misrepresentation in their defense of holding liberal views. The administration obviously has not made use of critical thinking skills, since they believe that our president has truly worked for the common good simply by being a community organizer in Chicago, and through being elected black in America. Racial healing is good and important but must have preceeded the elected one or we would not presently have a black president. Helping the needy and the marginalized is likewise admirable, but for Catholics this is not enough. Who is more defenseless and voiceless and in need of advocacy than our preborn children? Abortion and all anti-life policies are poitically polarizing, and they are contrary to the most fundamental teachings and mission of our Church. It is the duty of a Catholic university to put primary the sanctity of life, followed by other social issues as Pope John Paul II stated.

"At the 164th Commencement The May ExercisesThe University of Notre Dame Confers the degree of Doctor of Laws, honoris causa, on the 44th president of the United States, whose historic election opened a new era of hope in a country long divided by its history of slavery and racism. A community organizer who honed his advocacy for the poor, the marginalized and the worker in the streets of Chicago, he now organizes a larger community, bringing to the world stage a renewed American dedication to diplomacy and dialogue with all nations and religions committed to human rights and the global common good. Through his willingness to engage with those who disagree with him and encourage people of faith to bring their beliefs to the public debate, he is inspiring this nation to heal its divisions of religion, culture, race and politics in the audacious hope for a brighter tomorrow.

On Barack H. Obama, Washington, District of Columbia"

"Laws which authorize and promote abortion and euthanasia are therefore radically opposed not only to the good of the individual but also to the common good; as such they are completely lacking in authentic juridical validity. Disregard for the right to life, precisely because it leads to the killing of the person whom society exists to serve, is what most directly conflicts with the possibility of achieving the common good." (John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae 72)

Catholic Democrats respectfully disagrees. We believe that we can show America that a few vocal conservatives do not speak for all Catholics on this issue. And we particularly take exception to the angry and divisive tactics they have used to go after the Catholic identity of Notre Dame, President Obama, and all his Catholic supporters, without regard to the hidden costs to our Church and our country.

Catholic Democrats--good thing this is non-partisan, huh? Respectfully disagrees with what, exactly? They take issue with Catholicism, including our faithful Catholic lay persons like myself, our pro-life priests, Bishops, Cardinals, and our Popes. Respectfully? This invitation and honor is a travesty of faith which was thrust upon the Notre Dame Catholic graduates; whereby devout Catholic believers have no course left but to either raise the issue in protest, or be silent and go along for the sake of participating in their well-deserved celebration. Faithful conservative Catholics perhaps do not speak for all Catholics, but we are the ones who do speak for our Catholic faith. We particularly take exception to the disobedience and betrayal and underhanded tactics the administration has used to bring this scandal about. It is the nominal Catholics who do not understand the hidden costs to our Church and to our country. If you wish to be identified as Catholic--be Catholic! Otherwise, you are truly a shamefully misguided and misleading paradox.

Tuesday, May 5, 2009

The Constitution itself does not define what an Article II “natural born Citizen” is. Since the founding of the United States to the present, no court of any state or of the United States has decided whether a candidate for or sitting President has satisfied the Article II “natural born Citizen” requirement. The Constitution itself can be looked to for clues as to what the Framers meant by the “natural born Citizen” clause. There also exists ancient Greek and Roman law; civil law; American common law; John Jay’s letter to General Washington; records of constitutional debates on the Constitution, the Fourteenth Amendment, and Congressional Acts; natural law and Vattel’s legal treatise, The Law of Nations (a natural born citizen was one born in the country to parents who were both citizens; English common law allowed for the single circumstance of being born in the country to naturalize the children of a foreigner which meant they were not natural born; a child born in the country to a permanent resident became himself a permanent resident and not a citizen); Supreme Court case law; federal and state statutes; and historical precedent showing who has been President before and after 1779, which all tell us what an Article II “natural born Citizen” is. The political environment in which the Framers lived (transitioning from a monarchy to a Constitutional Republic) also provides further clues to the meaning of the term. Additionally, classical international law universally condemned dual nationality. From these sources, we learn that an Article II “natural born Citizen” is one that is born in the United States to a mother and father who are both United States citizens by birth or naturalization.

How we interpret the meaning of “natural born Citizen” in Article II should be driven by what the Framers intended the term to mean, as informed by what is in the best interest of the United States and the American people. In analyzing the citizenship requirements of Article II as it pertains to being eligible to be President, we are only looking to the citizenship requirement to be President and not to the requirement to be a born citizen of the United States under the Fourteenth Amendment, Congressional Acts, or any other law. The Article II citizenship standard to be President is higher than that to be a born citizen of the United States under these latter provisions and laws. It is for this reason that the Founding Fathers did not use the definition of a “natural born subject” as it existed in English common law as the definition of an Article II “natural born Citizen.” Any reasonable interpretation of Article II’s Presidential eligibility clause should provide the maximum benefit to the United States and the American people whom the President will represent. The American people deserve and under the Constitution are entitled, for their safety and survival and that of the United States, to the maximum degree of protection that they can possibly have from their President.

Requiring that a would-be President is born with no allegiances other than to the United States is in the best interest of the United States and the American people. The Founding Fathers (Jefferson, Hamilton, Madison), along with Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Louis Brandeis, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and Felix Frankfurter, among others, have all confirmed that undivided political loyalty to the United States should be an absolute condition of citizenship. John Fonte, Dual Allegiance: A Challenge to Immigration Reform and Patriotic Assimilation, November 2005, Center for Immigration Studies. http://www.cis.org/articles/2005/back1205.html.

Being born with sole allegiance to the United States requires that the child be born on United States soil to parents who are both United States citizens at the time of birth. Under such birth circumstances, the child inherits his/her citizenship from the soil of the United States and from both of his/her parents. In another post, I have referred to this joining of citizenships as “unity of citizenship.” If both parents at the time of the child’s birth are also United States citizens by birth or by naturalization, it will not be possible under any law of any other nation (e.g. laws of other nations that through jus sanguinis grant citizenship to the children born abroad to their citizens and that allow those foreign-born children to possess dual citizenship) that the child will inherit by descent from his or her parents any other nationality. Parents who are naturalized United States citizens, through the naturalization process and the oath of allegiance, have manifested their consent to be subject only to the jurisdiction of the United States and thereby cannot pass on to their child any nationality or allegiance other than that of the United States. Such a Constitutional rule assures that the child will have immediate attachment to the United States not only by being born on United States soil but also through his or her United States citizen parents. Such a rule also guarantees that no other nation has any claim to the child’s allegiance. It is that immediate and absolute attachment from birth which is the seed for future affinity and fidelity for the United States alone. That seed will also flourish and instill in the child love for and loyalty to the United States alone and impart in the child the Constitutional values handed down by the Founding Fathers to past, present, and future generations of Americans. These are qualities and values which the American people rightfully expect their President to have. This birth status in a would-be President becomes even more critical given that Article II only requires that he/she be a resident of the United States for only 14 years.

There simply is no benefit to the United States and its people in having a requirement that demands of a President anything less than absolute and sole allegiance to the United States from birth. The Executive, represented by the Office of President, is one of the three branches of Constitutional power under our Constitution. Chief Justice Marshall in the case of, The Exchange v. McFaddon, 11 U.S. 7 Cranch 116 116 (1812), said:

“The jurisdiction of the nation within its own territory is necessarily exclusive and absolute. It is susceptible of no limitation not imposed by itself. Any restriction upon it, deriving validity from an external source, would imply a diminution of its sovereignty to the extent of the restriction, and an investment of that sovereignty to the same extent in that power which could impose such restriction. All exceptions, therefore, to the full and complete power of a nation within its own territories must be traced up to the consent of the nation itself. They can flow from no other legitimate source. This consent may be either express or implied. In the latter case, it is less determinate, exposed more to the uncertainties of construction; but, if understood, not less obligatory.”

Allowing a person with dual citizenship and allegiance from birth to occupy that powerful position does nothing but weaken American constitutional and national sovereignty which in the words of Justice Marshall is absolute. With a child being born with dual nationalities and therefore dual allegiances (“nationals” include citizens and others who “owe permanent allegiance to the United States.” 8 U.S.C. Sec. 1101(a)(22)) , the United States would not have exclusive and absolute jurisdiction over that child upon his/her birth, the time that the Framers in Article II set to be critical to presidential eligibility. Another nation through jus sanguinis and dual citizenship provisions would also have jurisdiction over that child which would conflict with the jurisdiction and sovereignty of the United States. It is not reasonable to conclude that the United States would consent not to have full and complete jurisdiction over a child who could potentially grow and some day be vested with the executive power over the nation and its military.

The Founding Fathers expected the President and Commander in Chief of the Military to have the maximum attachment to the United States and to be free to the greatest degree possible of foreign influence. There is no reasonable justification for having a Constitutional eligibility requirement to be President that would allow a President from birth to dilute his/her attachment, allegiance, and fidelity to the United States. Given what we know since 1795 about the Founding Fathers’ demanding absolute and sole allegiance and loyalty to the United States from naturalized citizens, it simply is not reasonable to conclude that the Founding Fathers would have written a Presidential eligibility clause that would allow an individual, born with diminished and eroded American national loyalty, to occupy the Office of President.

Dual citizenship and allegiance in a President present a host of problems for him and the nation such as potential conflicts on how a President would conduct foreign affairs, perceive what are the national security interests of the United States, exercise his political loyalty to the United States, and satisfy his military service obligations to his other nation. A sitting President could conceivably have been or be required to satisfy a military obligation to a foreign nation in threatened or actual armed conflict with the United States. Stephen H. Legomsky, Dual Nationality and Military Service: Strategy Number Two, in David A. Martin & Kay Hailbronner (eds.) (2000). There is also the significant question of whether such a President should be given a top level security clearance which the Commander in Chief of the Military must have and which is required for military officers. These conflicts may potentially exist not only in the mind of the office holder himself but also in the minds of other nations and the American public itself, who would not have full confidence in his or her allegiance and loyalty to the United States. With the phenomenon of dual nationality growing rapidly in the United States, it becomes ever more important that Courts established now and not later that our Founding Fathers in Article II established that a Presidential contender cannot be born with dual nationalities and allegiances.

How is America to credibly stress to naturalizing immigrants who since 1795 are supposed to assimilate American Constitutional and political values and transfer their full allegiance, fidelity, and political loyalty solely to the United States if our nation allows a person to be President who was born with dual citizenship, i.e., Barack Obama,?

Finally, sole allegiance to the United States at birth in order to be President is not a very discriminatory requirement and it actually allows the most populous group of Americans to be President. Natural Born Citizens having sole allegiance to the USA make up the overwhelming majority of American citizens. On the other hand, dual citizens are actually a much smaller group and special category of citizens. The founders and framers wanted future Presidents and Commander-in-Chiefs to have sole allegiance to the USA and thus specified in Article II of our Constitution that future Presidents and Commander-in-Chiefs be selected only from the ranks of Natural Born Citizens of the USA, not from the ranks of dual citizens of two or more countries.

------------------------------------------------- Freedom and Liberty run in our blood! The President Who Hates His Country Joan Swirsky Bio Email Article

By Joan Swirsky Sunday, May 3, 2009 In the last century, the impassioned words and actions of patriots like Winston Churchill along with Americas heroic help and sacrifice saved Europe. The eloquence and actions of Ive been to the mountaintop Martin Luther King Jr. brought America to an unprecedented level of social justice.

The peerless oratory and tireless diplomacy of the man who would become Israels Foreign Minister, Abba Eban convinced the entire world that after the wanton murder of six-million Jews in the Holocaust its straggling survivors deserved their own state of Israel. The inspiring words and decisive actions of President Ronald Reagan ended the Cold War, tore down the Berlin Wall, and restored economic prosperity to America. The efforts of these towering figures resulted in a more highly-evolved world.

We have also seen the opposite in totalitarian leaders like Hitler, Mussolini, Fidel Castro, Pol Pot, Mao, and Saddam Hussein, among others, who exploited their masses, destroyed their economies, brought havoc, turbulence, grief and massive death within and outside of their countries, and made the world a more dangerous and threatening place.

The one thing all of these virtuous and evil men had in common was love for their respective countries, in fact a burning passion that superseded all else. The virtuous believed in freedom and democracy. The evil believed in subjugation of their peoples and lifetime tenures for themselves in order to actualize their goals of conquering their eternal enemies Americans and Jews.

Today, we have a new crop of inveterate America- and Jew-haters, among them the Marxist leader of Venezuela Hugo Chavez, Nicaraguas president Daniel Ortega, Irans death-to-America-and-Israel study-in-abnormal-psychology Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and the ever-sabotage-America and anti-Semitic leaders of the 22-Arab states that surround Israel.

I have either read about or observed firsthand all of these people. Yet in my decades of commenting on the political scene, I cannot recall a single leader of any country or regime who has ever spoken negatively of his country or tolerated others speaking ill of the land or the people he represented

Until now Bizarre and, yes, repugnant as it is to our essentially centrist country, America now has a president who has broken that time-honored tradition. Barack Obama, on the campaign trail and as the leader of the free world is the first U.S. president to proclaim to anyone within earshot that he, like his wife, is not proud of his country, and is all-too-willing to offer serial apologies for America! to Americans and foreigners alike.

As Ed Lasky writes: We know that during the campaign [Obama] warned that criticism of his wife was `off-limits. But criticism of America well, that is fine.

We also know that during his run for the presidency, Obama expressed sneering condescension towards all those bible-clasping, gun-owning yahoos who cling to those silly things, and that in Europe he consistently gave voice to Americas supposed sins. But all that pales in comparison to the clear contempt looks more like hatred to me that Obama feels for the United States of America and for its most revered founding document, the U.S. Constitution.

In just the first 100-days of his tenure, Obamas words and actions have demonstrated that he is no friend of the country he leads. This is only a smattering of what happened on his recent three-continent trip abroad and to Mexico:

In France, Obama told his audience that America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive toward Europe. In Prague, Obama in true utopian-kindergarten fashion pledged with conviction that America will seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons. In other words, destroy big bad Americas ability to defend itself! In London, Obama made clear that the worlds financial wealth was no longer made by those inferior leaders Roosevelt and Churchill, effectively ceding Americas leading role in creating and sharing wealth to nations that have never measured up to our countrys bountiful generosity or spirit of free-market entrepreneurship. In Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago, Obama sat passively while the Marxist Chavez handed him an American-bashing book and delivered another revile-America speech, while never once rising to defend our country. In Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago, Obama again sat passively while the Marxist Ortega blamed the United States for a century of what he called terroristic U.S. aggression in Central America, again emitting not a whisper of defense on our countrys behalf. In Turkey, Obama said incredibly and inaccurately that America was not a Christian nation. And in his recent trip to Mexico, Obama said that the escalating border violence was essentially Americas fault. Scan you memory. Can you think of any other leader in world history who so consistently badmouths his own country, or fails to defend it? I cant.

Wall St. Journal writer Dorothy Rabinowitz notes that Obama had gone to Europe not as the voice of his nation, but as a missionary with a message of atonement for its errors. No sitting American president had ever delivered indictments of this kind while abroad, or for that matter at home. When [our allies] see Obamas moral equivalence, they realize they are on their own and must cut their own deals to survive understanding that multicultural trendiness is now a cynical cover for moral laxity and cant we all get along?

Historian Victor Davis Hanson also noticed something odd about Obamas apology tour. Despite this fresh climate of atonement, there was a complete absence of a single apology from any other foreign leadernot a word came from Britain about colonialismnothing from Germany on the Holocaustnot a peep from France about Algeria or Vietnam. Turkey was mum on the Armenian killingsRussia said nothing about the 30 million murdered by StalinNothing came from China about the 70 million who perished under MaoMr. Medvedev said nothing about Putins brutish ruleWe saw no concrete evidence of any help or hope and change from any foreign leader. Zilch.

In addition, Hanson continues, We hear nothing about our Gettysburg, or our entry into World War I. Iwo Jima and the Bulge are never alluded to. Drawing the line in Korea and forcing the end of the Soviet monstrosity are taboo subjects. That we pledged the life of New York for Berlin in the Cold War is unknown. Liberating Afghanistan and Iraq from the diabolical Taliban and Saddam Hussein is left unsaid. The Civil Rights movement, the Great Society, affirmative action, and present billion-dollar foreign-aid programs apparently never existed. Millions of Africans have been saved by George Bushs efforts at extending life-saving medicines to AIDS patients but again, this is never referenced.

Blogger James Lewis says that Obamas obsessive need to put down his own country shows a stunningly ignorant man who has evidently never spoken to a concentration camp survivor, a Cuban refugee, a boat person from Vietnam, a Soviet dissident, or a survivor of Maos purges.

Abandoning allies, Embracing enemies If you are a longtime enemy of the United States, count on a grand reception from the Obama administration. All is forgiven and, worse, forgotten, write Dick Morris and Eileen McGann. But if you have a track record as an ally or friend, you wont get the right time of day.

Of course apologists for Obama & Co. point to progress in our foreign policy, ignoring, as Caroline Glick points out, that Americas betrayal of its democratic allies makes each of them more vulnerable to aggression at the hands of their enemies enemies the Obama administration is now actively attempting to appease. Glick lays out the cold hard facts:

Obama abrogated Americas strategic commitment to the defense of our ally Japan when his administration reacted to North Koreas ballistic missile test by saying the U.S. would only shoot the missile down if it targeted U.S. territory. Obama slapped our ally India when he refused to make ending Pakistans support for jihadist terror groups attacking India a central component of its strategy for contending with Pakistan and Afghanistan. Obama failed to assure our ally Iraq that democracy and freedom will be secured before U.S. forces are withdrawn next year. Obama de facto abandoned our allies in Eastern Europe when he announced his intention to forge a new alliance with Russia. The Czech, Polish, Georgian and Ukrainian governments, Glick says, were quick to recognize that Obamas strong desire to curry favor with the Kremlin and weaken his own country will imperil their ability to withstand Russian aggression. Obama is sacrificing the U.S.s alliance with our ally Israel in a bid to appease the Arabs and Iran by supporting the immediate establishment of a Palestinian state, which, Glick warns, requires Israel to commit national suicide in exchange for `peace. Obama also made clear that from the administrations perspective, an Israeli strike that prevents Iran from becoming a nuclear power is less acceptable than a nuclear-armed Iran. In addition, Obama sent Hamas $900 million of foreign aid, channeled through the UNRWA, a United Nations front filled with Hamas operatives Obama slapped our ally England when he returned the bust of Winston Churchill to Prime Minister Gordon Brown. Obama slapped our ally Colombia and its president Alvaro Uribe when he refused to submit the free trade deal with Bogota to the Senate. What= a great time to be our enemy! Glick exclaims. What a terrible time to be our friend!

And speaking about appeasing Iran, the Obama administration recently asked a federal judge to throw out a $6.6-billion class-action lawsuit against Iran filed by 52 American diplomats and military officials held hostage for more than a year at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran 30 years ago. Nothing like selling out Americans to make brownie points with a bloodthirsty dictator!

Barry Rubin explains: Friends, especially in Europe, are pleased, applaud, but then add that they dont have to give this guy anything because he is all apologies and no toughness. They like the fact that he is all carrots and no sticks. If, however, they are states more at riskthey worry that they cannot rely on the United States to help and defend them. Enemies or potential rivalssay that this guy is weak and defeated. He apologizes, offers unconditional engagements, and promises concessionstheyll eat the carrots and, if possible, their neighbors as well.

NY Post writer Ralph Peters, a former military intelligence officer, sums up the hate-America core tenets of the Obama Doctrine as follows: (1) Were to blame, (2) Problems can be negotiated away, (3) Problems that cant be talked out can be bought off, (4) Islamist terrorism doesnt exist, (5) Its all our fault, (6) Israels the obstacle to Middle East peace, (7) Our nukes threaten world peace and we need to get rid of them, (8) Our military is dangerous, (9) Our intelligence services are even more dangerous than our military, (10) Its only torture if we do it, and (11) Blame President George W. Bush.

Obama is clearly not satisfied with threatening the safety of our tried-and-true allies abroad. He is also determined to undermine the bedrock foundation of Americas security our military and intelligence agencies. By disclosing interrogation memos and planning to release photographs associated with military probes into prisoner abuse he has betrayed every heroic person who risks his or her life for our country, and unforgivably given aid-and-comfort to enemies who seethe with virulent anti-Americanism and lust for our demise. And in the Department of Homeland Securitys infamous memo, he has called members of our military, among others, potential domestic terrorists!

After September 1th, the general outcry was, Why dont we have better overseas capabilities? said Porter Goss, director of the CIA from September 2004 to May 2006. I fear that in the years to come, this refrain will be heard again. It is certainly not trust that is fostered when intelligence officers are told one day I have your back, only to learn a day later that a knife is being held to it.

How horrifying to contemplate that it is the President of the United States himself who is wielding that back-stabbing knife!

Questioning Obamas patriotism Before the November election, legal scholar Henry Mark Holzer wrote and scrupulously documented a stunning indictment of Obama in which he stated that Obamas repeatedly professed claim to be a patriot is a fraud on the American people and an insult to the countless true patriots who, for over two hundred years, have loved and loyally and zealously supported the United States of America.

Patriots, Holzer concluded, dont associate with and derive sustenance from terrorists, America-haters and anti-Semites; they dont countenance fixed elections; they dont keep secrets from voters; they dont intimidate their enemies; they dont denigrate and degrade our military; they dont gratuitously interfere with their governments efforts to protect our country; and they dont disdain the symbol of this great nation, which for over two centuries men and women have fought and died: the American flag. Whatever Barack Obama is, we can be certain that he is no patriot!

The events that have followed Obamas election, Holzer says, have compounded the proof of the presidents lack of patriotism, which he has recently spelled out in a follow-up article. A few of the many examples he provides of what a patriotic American president does not do include:

Bankrupt this country and court massive inflation in order to implement his vision of a fascist/socialist nation. Sit on his hands with a straight face while a South American thug insults his country. Appoint America-haters to his cabinet. Cozy up to a soon-to-be-nuclear-armed Iranian madman. Impotently watch the probably-already-nuclear-armed North Korean Stalinists lob a ballistic missile across the Pacific. Fail to stanch the flow of illegal aliens across the Mexican-United States border. Cut the defense budget. Strangle innovation during a serious recession by raising taxes. Close Guantanamo Bay without a clue of how to handle the enemy combatants incarcerated there. Publicly announce what measures military and CIA interrogators can use to extract information from terrorists. Apologize to the world for what has made America great and grovel to persons, nations. and institutions unfit to shine our shoes! Cede American sovereignty to the American-hating United Nations. Defy the Second Amendment and a Supreme Court decision by making an end run that substantially reduces the supply of certain ammunition. Repudiate the policy and practice of missile shield installation. Some dare call it treason It is one thing to question a presidents patriotism, but even more serious to accuse him of treason. In an open letter to Obama on Treason, Walter Francis Fitzpatrick, III (U.S. Naval Academy, Class of 1975) minces no words in accusing the president of sending Army forces to Samson, Alabama, and Boston in violation of the Constitution. Here are excerpts of his letter:

I have observed and extensively recorded invidious attacks by military-political aristocrats against the Constitution for twenty years. Now you have broken in and entered the White House by force of contrivance, concealment, conceit, and deceit. Posing as an imposter president and commander in chief, you have stripped civilian command and control over the military establishment We come now to the reckoning. I accuse you and your military-political criminal assistants of TREASON. I name you and your military criminal associates as traitors. Your criminal ascension manifests a clear and present danger. You fundamentally changed our form of government. The Constitution no longer works.

I identify you as a foreign-born domestic enemy. You are not my president. You are not my commander in chief.

Fitzpatrick is not alone. John Smith a blogger on Townhall.com, titled a recent article Obama Is a Traitor. Commenting on the presidents release of the torture memos, Smith says:

Given the actions of Barack Obama in recent days, one has to wonder how many soon-to-be released State secrets have been gathered by radical left-wing traitors and hidden in the dark recesses of Washington, awaiting the Manchurian Candidates command to publish them

The motivation for Obamas recent intentional disclosure of Top Secret CIA memorandawas an act committed solely to increase his own political power through appeasement of the radical leftor was it guided by the twisted moral imperative uniquely embraced by the Left, which dictates that only those actions that serve to limit individual liberty, punish patriotism, and destroy the traditions and culture of the United States of America are good?

Were Obamas actions motivated by a deeply rooted desire to harm this Nation?

Article III of the Constitution defines Treason against the United States as levying War against them or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

Top Secret information is the highest level of classification that we have on a national level. By definition, such material, if made public, will cause exceptionally grave damage to national security

The willful disclosure of Top Secret information is an act of Treason against the United States.A sitting President of The United States of America has committed Treason.

Fitzpatrick and Smith are among a rising tide of voices in and outside of the military who have observed with growing horror Obamas proclivity to destroy our capitalist economic system, subvert the U.S. Constitution, endanger our military and intelligence services, and obsequiously embrace Americas sworn enemies.

Dr. Jack Wheeler, a consummate Washington insider, goes one step further. The evidence that the President of the United States is a traitor is mounting. The evidence that the President of the United states is a mortal danger to Americas national security is mounting. The evidence that the President of the United States will not defend America from threats and insults from every two-bit fascist dictator in the world is not only mounting, it is overwhelming.

Writer Amy L. Geiger-Hammer states: I do wonder if Obama should be called a traitor or just incompetentdoes he ever talk about what a great country America is? And UK journalist Gerald Warner echoes that rising tide: If al-Qaeda, the Taliban and the rest of the Looney Tunes brigade want to kick America to death, they had better move in quickly and grab a piece of the action before Barack Obama finishes the job himself. Never in the history of the United States has a president worked so actively against the interests of his own people - not even Jimmy Carter. Obamas problem is that he does not know who the enemy is. To him, the enemy does not squat in caves in Waziristan, clutching automatic weapons and reciting the more militant verses from the Koran: instead, it sits around at tea parties in Kentucky quoting from the US Constitution.

Is America Lost? Multiple lawsuits to find proof that Obama is Constitutionally ineligible to be president are ongoing and will ultimately determine if he is an American or Kenyan or Indonesian or UK natural-born citizen. To this date, he has spent over a million dollars blocking the suits about his still-missing birth certificate, and there is increasing evidence that the birth certificate attested to by FactCheck.org, FightTheSmears.org, and DailyKos.com are forgeries. And of course we still have not seen Obamas Selective Service record, medical records, multiple visas, college transcripts, et al.

If Obama is proven to be the fraud and interloper many suspect, every one of his edicts, bills, laws, dictates, Supreme Court selections, et al, will be overturned , leaving America to cope with serious problems under the leadership of the incomprehensible Joe Biden but nothing approaching this hate-America presidents far-left socialist domestic programs and appease-our-enemies foreign policy.

The huge national turnouts at the Tea Parties of April 15 were only the beginning of a movement that was spurred by ordinary Americans waking up to Obamas destruction of our economy, his attempts to reshape America into a banana republic, the grave damage hes inflicted on our military and intelligence services, and his unsavory predilection for embracing our enemies and apologizing non-stop for the most magnificent nation on earth.

In short, they are waking up to the president who hates his country.

Editor Charlotte Baker predicts that the Tea Parties and other, more aggressive, protests will grow exponentially, and that the Obama juggernaut can and will be stopped. Its crucial, she says, for all Americans to recall the history they learned in school at least before the Left hijacked what used to be known as `education. The Europeans, Japanese and Russians were all taken over by one form or another of totalitarianism because their combined history was one of absolute rulers kings, czars and `divine emperors. They were totally conditioned to tyranny.

But the monstrous anti-American gang that rigged the voting system on November 4, 2008 as they do routinely in Obamas Chicago Machine politics to push Obama into We-the-Peoples White House, have shown even before his inauguration the kind of overreaching that arrogant tyrants always demonstrate. Hitler, Mao, Tojo and Stalin all got away with overreaching, but they werent brutalizing Americans.

Tolerating totalitarianism is simply not in the genetic code the DNA of Americans! Baker adds. Freedom and Liberty run in our blood!

Indeed!

(90) Reader Feedback | Subscribe

Joan Swirsky Most recent columns Joan Swirsky is an award winning author and journalist. Her work can be found at joanswirsky.com

Values1. Calling for the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act on the White House website.2. Listing on the White House website a call for the expansion of federal hate crimes to includehomosexual behavior.3. Calling on the White House website for policies like the “Fairness Doctrine” that could silenceconservative and Christian talk radio.4. Repealing limitations on taxpayer-funding of human embryonic stem cell research.5. Repealing limitations on taxpayer-funding of abortions overseas.6. Pledging $50 million to the United Nation’s Population Fund, which supports China’s draconian onec hild policy.7. Proposing new rules to gut conscience clause protections for pro-life doctors and other medical personnel who don’t want to be forced to perform abortions or other procedures that violate their values.8. Proposing increased funding for the nation’s largest abortion provider, Planned Parenthood.9. Calling on the White House website for “a goal that all middle and high school students do 50 hours of community service a year,” (mandatory volunteerism).10. Inviting homosexual families to the White House Easter Egg Roll.11. Allowing his attorney general to call for the reinstatement of Clinton-era restrictions on the Second Amendment.12. Breaking his promise not to appoint lobbyists to his administration. He hired 17 in his first two weeks.13. Breaking his promise to sign legislation only after a five-day period of public comments.14. Asking that the monogram for Jesus Christ be covered up during a televised speech at a Catholic university in which Obama quotes the Sermon on the Mount.

National Security15. Apologizing for America in Europe and Latin America.16. Bowing before the Muslim king of Saudi Arabia.17. Pledging to base America’s foreign policy toward Iran on “mutual respect” in a video to the Iranian people and Iran’s Holocaust-denying dictator.18. Returning the bust of Winston Churchill given to George Bush after 9/11 by our British allies.19. Giving British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, the leader of America’s most loyal ally, a box of DVDs that don’t work in British DVD players.20. Ordering Guantanamo Bay closed without any idea of where to send the terrorist suspects held there.21. Suggesting that some of those terrorists now at GITMO may kill again, but may also be released onto U.S. soil and set up with welfare benefits.22. Caving to communist Cuba by relaxing travel restrictions and remittances for Cuban Americans before any Cuban political prisoners have been released.23. Shaking hands with Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez.24. Sitting silently though a 50-minute anti-American diatribe by Nicaragua’s communist president, Daniel Ortega.25. Releasing Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, the suspected mastermind of the 2000 suicide bombing of the U.S.S. Cole.26. Releasing classified CIA memos outlining our interrogation techniques.27. Telling our CIA agents not to be discouraged when he acknowledges their “mistakes.”28. Declaring a new openness to “truth commissions” and prosecuting intelligence officials involved in enhanced interrogations of terrorists.29. Proposing to send a $900 million foreign aid package to Palestinians in Gaza.30. Asking Congress to relax the law so that some of that money could go to the terrorist organization Hamas.31. Calling for the U.S. to eliminate its nuclear weapons.32. Telling Russian President Demitri Medvedev that America’s commitment to missile defense is negotiable.33. Dropping the term “enemy combatants” for GITMO detainees.34. Dropping the term “terrorism” for “man-made disaster.”35. Dropping the term “Global War on Terror” for “overseas contingency operations.”36. Giving his first interview as president to the Arab language network Al-Arabiya.37. Telling the Muslim world that his “job” was to communicate “that the Americans are not your enemy,” when it’s Muslim extremists who have declared war on us.38. Proposing that military veterans use private insurance for the cost of a service-related injury before they would be eligible for coverage through the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.

Free Enterprise39. Signing the trillion-dollar plus so-called “stimulus” bill, which the Congressional Budget Office said would actually hurt long-term economic growth.40. Saying Caterpillar wouldn’t lay off workers if his trillion-dollar stimulus bill passed Congress. Obama signed the bill on Feb. 17th. On March 17th, Caterpillar laid off nearly 2,500 workers.41. Hosting a “Fiscal Responsibility Summit” one week after signing the trillion-dollar “stimulus” bill.42. Railing against “outrageous recklessness and greed” of AIG bonuses that were legally protected in the so-called “stimulus” bill he signed four days after it passed, not five as he promised.43. Breaking his promise on earmark reform by signing the $410 billion “omnibus” spending bill with billions in earmarks.44. Proposing a $3.6 trillion budget that doubles the national debt in five years and triples it in ten years.45. Proposing a “carbon cap and trade” scheme that will raise energy taxes by hundreds of billions, even trillions, of dollars.46. Burning more than 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to fly to Iowa for Earth Day to promote “wind power.”47. Proposing $634 billion in higher taxes for socialized health care.48. Proposing to raise taxes on small business owners.49. Saying the White House is open to the idea of taxing employer-sponsored health care benefits as income.50. Signing a massive expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, calling it “a down payment on my commitment to cover every single American.”51. Establishing the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research to give bureaucrats the power to ration health care and tell your doctors what care you can and cannot have.52. Signing the 2009 Omnibus Public Land Management Act, which the Sierra Club praised specifically because it “will safeguard millions of acres … from oil and gas leasing.”53. Suggesting he has found $1.5 trillion in bogus “savings” by not spending money in Iraq that we were not planning to spend years from now.54. Ordering his Cabinet to “cut” $100 million in spending in 90 days, after proposing nearly $5 trillion in spending in his first 90 days.55. Proposing to limit tax deductions for home mortgage interest.56. Proposing to limit tax deductions for charitable donations.57. Refusing to allow banks to repay TARP money.58. Bailing out AMTRAK with a 10% increase in its taxpayer subsidies.59. Bailing out the United Auto Workers Union with billions of taxpayer dollars to GM and Chrysler.60. Bailing out the United Auto Workers by giving it a majority ownership stake in Chrysler. Yes, the union will own the company.61. Bailing out Big Labor by issuing an executive order mandating that infrastructure projects paid for with “stimulus” funds must use union labor, guaranteeing higher costs for the taxpayer.62. Bailing out Big Labor again by repealing regulations requiring the disclosure of how union dues are spent. So much for “transparency.”63. Saying, “The United States government has no interest in running GM,” then vowing that the government will back auto warranties.64. Saying, “The United States government has no interest in running GM,” then firing the CEO of General Motors.65. Allowing states to set their own fuel efficiency and emissions standards, making it harder forstruggling auto makers to compete.

Personnel Is Policy66. Nominating Timothy “The Turbo Tax Evader” Geithner as Treasury Secretary to oversee the IRS.67. Nominating as attorney general Eric Holder, who urged Bill Clinton to pardon tax evader Marc Rich and 8 FALN terrorists.68. Nominating David Ogden, a prominent attorney for the pornography industry, to be Deputy Attorney General.69. Nominating Tom Daschle, who owed more than $140,000 in back taxes, as Health and Human Services Secretary.70. Nominating Kathleen Sebelius, who is ardently pro-abortion and owed $8,000 in back taxes, to be HHS Secretary.71. Nominating Janet Napolitano, who said, “crossing the border is not a crime per se,” as Homeland Security Secretary.72. Nominating Steven Chu as Energy Secretary. Last September, Chu said, “Somehow, we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe,” which at that time were roughly $8.00 a gallon.73. Nominating Ron Kirk, who owed more than $6,000 in back taxes, as Trade Representative.74. Nominating Bill Richardson, who was embroiled in an ethics scandal, as Secretary of Commerce.75. Nominating Nancy Killefer, who also owed back taxes, to be the government’s “Efficiency Czar.”76. Nominating Rosa Brooks, a leftwing acolyte of George Soros, as an advisor to the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy.77. Nominating Harold Koh, an ardent supporter of using international law in the interpretation of our Constitution, to be the top legal advisor to the State Department.78. Nominating Carol Browner, who was a member of the Socialist International, to be “Climate and Energy Czar.”79. Nominating John Holdren, an environmental extremist and advocate of population control, as the White House Science Advisor.80. Nominating Dawn Johnsen, who is so pro-abortion she once compared pregnancy to slavery, to direct the Office of Legal Counsel at the Justice Department.81. Nominating Charles Freeman, an anti-Israel, pro-Arab apologist, to be head of the NationalIntelligence Council.82. Nominating Tony West, who represented American Taliban John Walker Lindh and exposed the Bush Administration’s terrorist surveillance program, to the Justice Department’s Civil Division.83. Nominating Annette Nazareth to be Deputy Treasury Secretary, who withdrew after a month-long probe into her taxes.84. Trying to nominate pro-abortion Catholics to be ambassador to the Vatican, a move even John Kerry opposed.85. Appointing Ellen Moran of the pro-abortion group Emily’s List as his White House communications director.86. Appointing Melody Barnes, a board member of Emily’s List and Planned Parenthood, as his director of the Domestic Policy Council.87. Appointing Harry Knox of the Human Rights Campaign (the largest homosexual rights lobbying group) to the White House’s Faith Based Advisory Council.88. Appointing Adolfo Carrion as Director of White House Office of Urban Affairs, even though he is under investigation for kickbacks in a scandal nearly identical to one that cost GOP Senator Ted Stevens his election.89. Nominating David Hamilton as his first appointment to a federal appeals court. Judge Hamilton has issued a number of controversial rulings, including prohibiting the Indiana House of Representatives from opening sessions with prayers in the name of Jesus.

Miscellaneous90. Telling congressional Republicans to stop listening to Rush Limbaugh.91. Coordinating attacks on Rush Limbaugh, Rick Santelli and Jim Cramer out of the White House.92. Hosting weekly parties at the White House, serving up $100-a-pound Waygu beef during what Obama called, “the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.”93. Laughing it up on 60 Minutes as the country is mired in a recession.94. Allowing Air Force One to buzz the Statue of Liberty and lower Manhattan, creating panic in New York City.95. Disparaging Special Olympians on the Tonight Show.96. Allowing his Department of Homeland Security to issue a report accusing pro-life, smaller government conservatives and returning Iraq/Afghanistan veterans of being “rightwing extremists.”97. Promising to push for comprehensive immigration reform, i.e., amnesty.98. Killing the school voucher program in the District of Columbia, while sending his two daughters to an elite private school, rather than D.C.’s public schools.99. Moving the Census out of the Department of Commerce and into the White House.100. Relying too much on his teleprompter.

Freedom and Liberty run in our blood!

The President Who Hates His Country

In the last century, the impassioned words and actions of patriots like Winston Churchill – along with America’s heroic help and sacrifice – saved Europe. The eloquence and actions of “I’ve been to the mountaintop” Martin Luther King Jr. brought America to an unprecedented level of social justice.

The peerless oratory and tireless diplomacy of the man who would become Israel’s Foreign Minister, Abba Eban convinced the entire world that after the wanton murder of six-million Jews in the Holocaust its straggling survivors deserved their own state of Israel. The inspiring words and decisive actions of President Ronald Reagan ended the Cold War, tore down the Berlin Wall, and restored economic prosperity to America. The efforts of these towering figures resulted in a more highly-evolved world.

We have also seen the opposite in totalitarian leaders like Hitler, Mussolini, Fidel Castro, Pol Pot, Mao, and Saddam Hussein, among others, who exploited their masses, destroyed their economies, brought havoc, turbulence, grief and massive death within and outside of their countries, and made the world a more dangerous and threatening place.

The one thing all of these virtuous and evil men had in common was love for their respective countries, in fact a burning passion that superseded all else. The virtuous believed in freedom and democracy. The evil believed in subjugation of their peoples and lifetime tenures for themselves in order to actualize their goals of conquering their eternal enemies – Americans and Jews.

Today, we have a new crop of inveterate America- and Jew-haters, among them the Marxist leader of Venezuela Hugo Chavez, Nicaragua’s president Daniel Ortega, Iran’s “death-to-America-and-Israel” study-in-abnormal-psychology Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and the ever-sabotage-America and anti-Semitic “leaders” of the 22-Arab states that surround Israel.

I have either read about or observed firsthand all of these people. Yet in my decades of commenting on the political scene, I cannot recall a single leader of any country or regime who has ever spoken negatively of his country or tolerated others speaking ill of the land or the people he represented

Until now

Bizarre and, yes, repugnant as it is to our essentially centrist country, America now has a president who has broken that time-honored tradition. Barack Obama, on the campaign trail and as the leader of the free world is the first U.S. president to proclaim to anyone within earshot that he, like his wife, is not proud of his country, and is all-too-willing to offer serial apologies – for America! – to Americans and foreigners alike.

As Ed Lasky writes: “We know that during the campaign [Obama] warned that criticism of his wife was `off-limits’. But criticism of America – well, that is fine.”

We also know that during his run for the presidency, Obama expressed sneering condescension towards all those bible-clasping, gun-owning yahoos who “cling” to those silly things, and that in Europe he consistently gave voice to America’s supposed “sins.” But all that pales in comparison to the clear contempt – looks more like hatred to me – that Obama feels for the United States of America and for its most revered founding document, the U.S. Constitution.

In just the first 100-days of his tenure, Obama’s words and actions have demonstrated that he is no friend of the country he leads. This is only a smattering of what happened on his recent three-continent trip abroad and to Mexico:

In France, Obama told his audience that America “has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive” toward Europe.

In Prague, Obama – in true utopian-kindergarten fashion – pledged “with conviction” that America will “seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons.” In other words, destroy big bad America’s ability to defend itself!

In London, Obama made clear that the world’s financial wealth was no longer made by those inferior leaders Roosevelt and Churchill, effectively ceding America’s leading role in creating and sharing wealth to nations that have never measured up to our country’s bountiful generosity or spirit of free-market entrepreneurship.

In Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago, Obama sat passively while the Marxist Chavez handed him an American-bashing book and delivered another revile-America speech, while never once rising to defend our country.

In Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago, Obama again sat passively while the Marxist Ortega blamed the United States for a century of what he called terroristic U.S. aggression in Central America, again emitting not a whisper of defense on our country’s behalf.

In Turkey, Obama said – incredibly and inaccurately – that America was not a Christian nation.

And in his recent trip to Mexico, Obama said that the escalating border violence was essentially America’s fault.

Scan you memory. Can you think of any other leader in world history who so consistently badmouths his own country, or fails to defend it? I can’t.

Wall St. Journal writer Dorothy Rabinowitz notes that Obama “had gone to Europe not as the voice of his nation, but as a missionary with a message of atonement for its errors. No sitting American president had ever delivered indictments of this kind while abroad, or for that matter at home. When [our allies] see Obama’s moral equivalence, they realize they are on their own and must cut their own deals to survive – understanding that multicultural trendiness is now a cynical cover for moral laxity and ‘can’t we all get along?’

Historian Victor Davis Hanson also noticed something odd about Obama’s apology tour. “Despite this fresh climate of atonement, there was a complete absence of a single apology from any other foreign leader…not a word came from Britain about colonialism…nothing from Germany on the Holocaust…not a peep from France about Algeria or Vietnam. Turkey was mum on the Armenian killings…Russia said nothing about the 30 million murdered by Stalin…Nothing came from China about the 70 million who perished under Mao…Mr. Medvedev said nothing about Putin’s brutish rule…We saw no concrete evidence of any help — or hope and change — from any foreign leader. Zilch.”

In addition, Hanson continues, “We hear nothing about our Gettysburg, or our entry into World War I. Iwo Jima and the Bulge are never alluded to. Drawing the line in Korea and forcing the end of the Soviet monstrosity are taboo subjects. That we pledged the life of New York for Berlin in the Cold War is unknown. Liberating Afghanistan and Iraq from the diabolical Taliban and Saddam Hussein is left unsaid. The Civil Rights movement, the Great Society, affirmative action, and present billion-dollar foreign-aid programs apparently never existed. Millions of Africans have been saved by George Bush’s efforts at extending life-saving medicines to AIDS patients — but again, this is never referenced.”

Blogger James Lewis says that Obama’s “obsessive need to put down his own country shows a stunningly ignorant man who has evidently never spoken to a concentration camp survivor, a Cuban refugee, a boat person from Vietnam, a Soviet dissident, or a survivor of Mao’s purges.”

Abandoning allies, Embracing enemies

“If you are a longtime enemy of the United States, count on a grand reception from the Obama administration. All is forgiven and, worse, forgotten,” write Dick Morris and Eileen McGann. “But if you have a track record as an ally or friend, you won’t get the right time of day.”

Of course apologists for Obama & Co. point to “progress” in our foreign policy, ignoring, as Caroline Glick points out, that “America’s betrayal of its democratic allies makes each of them more vulnerable to aggression at the hands of their enemies – enemies the Obama administration is now actively attempting to appease.” Glick lays out the cold hard facts:

Obama abrogated America’s strategic commitment to the defense of our ally Japan when his administration reacted to North Korea’s ballistic missile test by saying the U.S. would only shoot the missile down if it targeted U.S. territory.

Obama slapped our ally India when he refused to make ending Pakistan’s support for jihadist terror groups attacking India a central component of its strategy for contending with Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Obama failed to assure our ally Iraq that democracy and freedom will be secured before U.S. forces are withdrawn next year.

Obama de facto abandoned our allies in Eastern Europe when he announced his intention to forge a new alliance with Russia. “The Czech, Polish, Georgian and Ukrainian governments,” Glick says, “were quick to recognize that Obama’s strong desire to curry favor with the Kremlin and weaken his own country will imperil their ability to withstand Russian aggression.”

Obama “is sacrificing the U.S.’s alliance with our ally Israel “in a bid to appease the Arabs and Iran by supporting the immediate establishment of a Palestinian state,” which, Glick warns, “requires Israel to commit national suicide in exchange for `peace.’” Obama also made clear “that from the administration’s perspective, an Israeli strike that prevents Iran from becoming a nuclear power is less acceptable than a nuclear-armed Iran.” In addition, Obama sent Hamas $900 million of foreign aid, “channeled through the UNRWA, a United Nations front filled with Hamas operatives”

Obama slapped our ally England when he returned the bust of Winston Churchill to Prime Minister Gordon Brown.

Obama slapped our ally Colombia and its president Alvaro Uribe when he refused to submit the free trade deal with Bogota to the Senate.

“What a great time to be our enemy!” Glick exclaims. “What a terrible time to be our friend!”

And speaking about appeasing Iran, the Obama administration recently asked a federal judge to throw out a $6.6-billion class-action lawsuit against Iran filed by 52 American diplomats and military officials held hostage for more than a year at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran 30 years ago. Nothing like selling out Americans to make brownie points with a bloodthirsty dictator!

Barry Rubin explains: “Friends, especially in Europe, are pleased, applaud, but then add that they don’t have to give this guy anything because he is all apologies and no toughness. They like the fact that he is all carrots and no sticks. If, however, they are states more at risk…they worry that they cannot rely on the United States to help and defend them. Enemies or potential rivals…say that this guy is weak and defeated. He apologizes, offers unconditional engagements, and promises concessions…they’ll eat the carrots and, if possible, their neighbors as well.”

NY Post writer Ralph Peters, a former military intelligence officer, sums up the hate-America core tenets of the “Obama Doctrine” as follows: (1) We’re to blame, (2) Problems can be negotiated away, (3) Problems that can’t be talked out can be bought off, (4) Islamist terrorism doesn’t exist, (5) It’s all our fault, (6) Israel’s the obstacle to Middle East peace, (7) Our nukes threaten world peace and we need to get rid of them, (8) Our military is dangerous, (9) Our intelligence services are even more dangerous than our military, (10) It’s only torture if we do it, and (11) Blame President George W. Bush.

Obama is clearly not satisfied with threatening the safety of our tried-and-true allies abroad. He is also determined to undermine the bedrock foundation of America’s security – our military and intelligence agencies. By disclosing interrogation memos – and planning to release photographs associated with military probes into prisoner abuse – he has betrayed every heroic person who risks his or her life for our country, and unforgivably given aid-and-comfort to enemies who seethe with virulent anti-Americanism and lust for our demise. And in the Department of Homeland Security’s infamous memo, he has called members of our military, among others, potential domestic terrorists!

“After September 1th, the general outcry was, ‘Why don’t we have better overseas capabilities?’” said Porter Goss, director of the CIA from September 2004 to May 2006. “I fear that in the years to come, this refrain will be heard again. It is certainly not trust that is fostered when intelligence officers are told one day ‘I have your back,’ only to learn a day later that a knife is being held to it.”

How horrifying to contemplate that it is the President of the United States himself who is wielding that back-stabbing knife!

Questioning Obama’s patriotism

Before the November election, legal scholar Henry Mark Holzer wrote – and scrupulously documented – a stunning indictment of Obama in which he stated that Obama’s repeatedly professed claim to be a patriot is “a fraud on the American people – and an insult to the countless true patriots who, for over two hundred years, have loved and loyally and zealously supported the United States of America.”

“Patriots,” Holzer concluded, “don’t associate with and derive sustenance from terrorists, America-haters and anti-Semites; they don’t countenance fixed elections; they don’t keep secrets from voters; they don’t intimidate their enemies; they don’t denigrate and degrade our military; they don’t gratuitously interfere with their government’s efforts to protect our country; and they don’t disdain the symbol of this great nation, which for over two centuries men and women have fought and died: the American flag. Whatever Barack Obama is, we can be certain that he is no patriot!”

The events that have followed Obama’s election, Holzer says, “have compounded the proof of the president’s lack of patriotism,” which he has recently spelled out in a follow-up article. A few of the many examples he provides of what “a patriotic American president does not do include:

Bankrupt this country and court massive inflation in order to implement his vision of a fascist/socialist nation.

Sit on his hands with a straight face while a South American thug insults his country.

Appoint America-haters to his cabinet.

Cozy up to a soon-to-be-nuclear-armed Iranian madman.

Impotently watch the probably-already-nuclear-armed North Korean Stalinists lob a ballistic missile across the Pacific.

Fail to stanch the flow of illegal aliens across the Mexican-United States border.

Cut the defense budget.

Strangle innovation during a serious recession by raising taxes.

Close Guantanamo Bay without a clue of how to handle the enemy combatants incarcerated there.

Publicly announce what measures military and CIA interrogators can use to extract information from terrorists.

Apologize to the world for what has made America great and grovel to persons, nations. and institutions unfit to shine our shoes!

Cede American sovereignty to the American-hating United Nations.

Defy the Second Amendment and a Supreme Court decision by making an end run that substantially reduces the supply of certain ammunition.

Repudiate the policy and practice of missile shield installation.”

Some dare call it treason

It is one thing to question a president’s patriotism, but even more serious to accuse him of treason. In an open letter to Obama on Treason, Walter Francis Fitzpatrick, III (U.S. Naval Academy, Class of 1975) minces no words in accusing the president of sending Army forces to Samson, Alabama, and Boston in violation of the Constitution. Here are excerpts of his letter:

“I have observed and extensively recorded invidious attacks by military-political aristocrats against the Constitution for twenty years. Now you have broken in and entered the White House by force of contrivance, concealment, conceit, and deceit. Posing as an imposter president and commander in chief, you have stripped civilian command and control over the military establishment… “We come now to the reckoning. I accuse you and your military-political criminal assistants of TREASON. I name you and your military criminal associates as traitors. Your criminal ascension manifests a clear and present danger. You fundamentally changed our form of government. The Constitution no longer works….

“I identify you as a foreign-born domestic enemy. You are not my president. You are not my commander in chief.

Fitzpatrick is not alone. John Smith – a blogger on Townhall.com, titled a recent article “Obama Is a Traitor.” Commenting on the president’s release of the “torture” memos, Smith says:

“Given the actions of Barack Obama in recent days, one has to wonder how many soon-to-be released State secrets have been gathered by radical left-wing traitors and hidden in the dark recesses of Washington, awaiting the Manchurian Candidate’s command to publish them…

“The motivation for Obama’s recent intentional disclosure of Top Secret CIA memoranda…was an act committed solely to increase his own political power through appeasement of the radical left…or was it …guided by the twisted moral imperative uniquely embraced by the Left, which dictates that only those actions that serve to limit individual liberty, punish patriotism, and destroy the traditions and culture of the United States of America are good?…

“Were Obama’s actions motivated by a deeply rooted desire to harm this Nation?…

“Article III of the Constitution defines Treason against the United States as “… levying War against them or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort…”.

“Top Secret information is the highest level of classification that we have on a national level. By definition, such material, if made public, will cause “exceptionally grave damage” to national security…

“The willful disclosure of Top Secret information is an act of Treason against the United States….A sitting President of The United States of America has committed Treason.”

Fitzpatrick and Smith are among a rising tide of voices – in and outside of the military – who have observed with growing horror Obama’s proclivity to destroy our capitalist economic system, subvert the U.S. Constitution, endanger our military and intelligence services, and obsequiously embrace America’s sworn enemies.

Dr. Jack Wheeler, a consummate Washington insider, goes one step further. “The evidence that the President of the United States is a traitor is mounting. The evidence that the President of the United states is a mortal danger to America’s national security is mounting. The evidence that the President of the United States will not defend America from threats and insults from every two-bit fascist dictator in the world …is not only mounting, it is overwhelming.”

Writer Amy L. Geiger-Hammer states: “I do wonder if Obama should be called a traitor or just incompetent…does he ever talk about what a great country America is?” And UK journalist Gerald Warner echoes that rising tide: “If al-Qaeda, the Taliban and the rest of the Looney Tunes brigade want to kick America to death, they had better move in quickly and grab a piece of the action before Barack Obama finishes the job himself. Never in the history of the United States has a president worked so actively against the interests of his own people - not even Jimmy Carter. Obama’s problem is that he does not know who the enemy is. To him, the enemy does not squat in caves in Waziristan, clutching automatic weapons and reciting the more militant verses from the Koran: instead, it sits around at tea parties in Kentucky quoting from the US Constitution. “

Is America Lost?

Multiple lawsuits to find proof that Obama is Constitutionally ineligible to be president are ongoing and will ultimately determine if he is an American or Kenyan or Indonesian or UK “natural-born” citizen. To this date, he has spent over a million dollars blocking the suits about his still-missing birth certificate, and there is increasing evidence that the birth certificate attested to by FactCheck.org, FightTheSmears.org, and DailyKos.com are forgeries. And of course we still have not seen Obama’s Selective Service record, medical records, multiple visas, college transcripts, et al.

If Obama is proven to be the fraud and interloper many suspect, every one of his edicts, bills, laws, dictates, Supreme Court selections, et al, will be overturned , leaving America to cope with serious problems – under the leadership of the incomprehensible Joe Biden – but nothing approaching this hate-America president’s far-left socialist domestic programs and appease-our-enemies foreign policy.

The huge national turnouts at the Tea Parties of April 15 were only the beginning of a movement that was spurred by ordinary Americans waking up to Obama’s destruction of our economy, his attempts to reshape America into a banana republic, the grave damage he’s inflicted on our military and intelligence services, and his unsavory predilection for embracing our enemies and apologizing non-stop for the most magnificent nation on earth.

In short, they are waking up to the president who hates his country.

Editor Charlotte Baker predicts that “the Tea Parties and other, more aggressive, protests will grow exponentially, and that the Obama juggernaut can and will be stopped.” It’s crucial, she says, “for all Americans to recall the history they learned in school – at least before the Left hijacked what used to be known as `education.’ The Europeans, Japanese and Russians were all taken over by one form or another of totalitarianism because their combined history was one of absolute rulers – kings, czars and `divine’ emperors. They were totally conditioned to tyranny.

“But the monstrous anti-American gang that rigged the voting system on November 4, 2008– as they do routinely in Obama’s Chicago Machine politics – to push Obama into We-the-People’s White House, have shown – even before his inauguration – the kind of overreaching that arrogant tyrants always demonstrate. Hitler, Mao, Tojo and Stalin all got away with overreaching, but they weren’t brutalizing Americans.

“Tolerating totalitarianism is simply not in the genetic code – the DNA – of Americans!” Baker adds. “Freedom and Liberty run in our blood!”

For immediate release… 5/1/09Everyone seeing this needs to call the Tennessee US Attorneys office and demand ACTION, further, all Circuit court Judges who we serve our indictments to need to be handed a copy of this Criminal Complaint. Our Government is sitting on this. Failure to act means they are complicit. This has been validated as authentic.

Below please find a special message from one of our advertisers, United States Justice Foundation. From time to time, we receive opportunities we believe you as a valued customer may want to know about. Please note that the following message does not necessarily reflect the editorial positions of Human Events.

Dear Friend of the Constitution,

The biggest political cover up in American history is taking place right before our eyes.

Worse than Watergate, Whitewatergate, or any of the other cover ups

of previous administrations, is the question of whether Barack Hussein

Obama is eligible to serve as President of the United States of America...

OR, is he a FRAUD, a USURPER, a man with no legal authority to sit in

the position that he now claims to hold?

Barack Obama could simply put the issue to rest right now by releasing

his ACTUAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE! But he WON'T! Instead, he has had

teams of attorneys all over the country, fighting "tooth and nail" to

thwart the efforts of the United States Justice Foundation (USJF),

and our allies in a number of states to compel him to produce an

ACTUAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE and to prove that he is Constitutionally

eligible to be President of the United States!

HELP US EXPOSE THE OBAMA COVER-UPDON'T LET HIM RIP THE CONSTITUTION TO SHREDS!CLICK HERE

Ohio, Mississippi, Hawaii, and California! These are the states where USJF

has been involved in lawsuits seeking an answer to the

critical constitutional question!

And now in California, just like in every lawsuit filed over this issue,

the Obama team of attorneys, working with liberal allies in the office

of the California Attorney General's Office, has convinced a Sacramento

County Superior Court judge to dismiss USJF's suit to force the truth to

come out about whether Barack Obama is a "natural born" citizen, and

therefore eligible to serve as President of the United States.

BUT WE'RE NOT GIVING UP! Our clients in this case, including 2008

candidate for President of the United States, Alan Keyes, have given

USJF the go ahead to file an appeal of this decision!

AND THAT'S WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO -- BUT NEED YOUR

HELP TO DO IT!

HELP US EXPOSE THE OBAMA COVER-UPDON'T LET HIM RIP THE CONSTITUTION TO SHREDS!CLICK HERE

A number of apologists for Barack Obama have gone to great lengths to

belittle USJF and our allies in the fight to preserve our Constitution.

However, the questions that they cannot answer are:

If Barack Hussein Obama has nothing to hide, WHY doesn't he just make

his real birth certificate public? WHY has he spent a reported $800,000.00

in attorney fees to fight efforts to obtain his ACTUAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE?

The more that he fights these efforts to see it, the more you have to wonder, WHY?

The Obama supporters want everyone to believe that only "fringies,"

the people that they now call "birthers,", in other words, only people

that they claim are outside of the main stream of thinking, question

whether Mr. Obama is eligible to serve as President. But the truth of the

matter is that more and more people, including many federal, state,

and local elected officials, AND many in the military, are questioning

whether Barack Hussein Obama is a "natural born citizen," a requirement

for him to serve as President of the United States.

The citizens of the United States have the right to know if Barack Obama

is eligible to serve as President! And we here at the United States Justice

Foundation are going to take our lawsuit

all the way up to the United States Supreme Court, if that is what

is necessary, to find out the answer to this critical question.

This fight to discover the truth will be neither easy nor inexpensive,

but isn't protecting the Constitution worth it? And that is exactly what

this legal battle is all about,

PROTECTING THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION!

HELP US EXPOSE THE OBAMA COVER-UPDON'T LET HIM RIP THE CONSTITUTION TO SHREDS!CLICK HERE

Barack Obama wants you to ignore what he is doing, he wants you to

ignore the U.S. Constitution, he wants you to think that the parts of the

Constitution that he does not agree with (like the requirements to serve

as President) are unimportant.

In effect, he wants to destroy the U. S. Constitution and reshape it into

his own image of what he wants it to be.

And Barack Obama's attorneys have now taken another big step to

destroy the Constitution of the United States -- this time in a California

State Court. Those attorneys, working with liberal California State

Attorney General Jerry Brown, convinced the Judge in our case,

at a March 13, 2009, hearing to rule that only Members of Congress

can challenge the qualifications of Mr. Obama to serve as President.

And, the Judge further ruled that such a challenge could only be made

on the 6th day of January following the meeting of the Presidential

electors, at the session of Congress where the vote of the Electoral

College is counted and the results announced. To use the Judge's

words, this is "the exclusive means for challenges to the qualifications

of President..."

That means that no one, except a Member of Congress, and only on

one certain day of the year following the Presidential election, can

challenge the qualifications of the President. And then, the challenge

can only be successful if a majority of the Members of Congress

support the challenge!

And that means that the requirements of the U. S. Constitution as to

the eligibility of the man or woman who runs for President to serve as

President are meaningless!

Do you believe that the Constitution is a meaningless document?

Do you believe that a majority of the Members of Congress have

the right to ignore it? To render it of no force and effect?

The Trial Court Judge in our case did! But we are not going to accept

his decision. We are not going to accept the legal arguments made

by Barack Hussein Obama's attorneys, and those by liberal California

Attorney General Jerry Brown. We are going to keep fighting this

monumentally important legal battle all the way up to the United

States Supreme Court if that is what is necessary.

IT'S A BATTLE THAT WE MUST FIGHT!

IT'S A BATTLE THAT WE MUST WIN!

IT'S A BATTLE THAT WILL DECIDE WHETHER THE UNITED

STATES OF AMERICA WILL REMAIN A CONSTITUTIONAL

REPUBLIC, OR WHETHER WE WILL JOIN THE DUST HEAP

OF HISTORY AS JUST ANOTHER FAILED EXPERIMENT!

USJF IS IN A BATTLE THAT COULD CHANGE THE HISTORY

OF OUR GREAT COUNTRY! -- but we need YOUR help to WIN!

HELP US EXPOSE THE OBAMA COVER-UPDON'T LET HIM RIP THE CONSTITUTION TO SHREDS!CLICK HERE

We MUST learn the truth about whether Barack Obama

is a "natural born citizen!

But to blunt our efforts to learn the truth, the Trial Court also blocked

our subpoena for the college records of Mr. Obama! These vital

records could have proven whether Barack Hussein Obama is

eligible to serve as President of the United States, or whether

he is a USURPER, a FRAUD, sitting in the oval office without any

legal authority to do so!

USJF had subpoenaed the records of Barack Hussein Obama from

Occidental College in California, but, at the hearing on

March 13, 2009, the Judge, in Sacramento County Superior

Court in California, blocked USJF from obtaining those critical records.

What is in those records? We do not know. But the Obama legal team

pulled out all of the stops to block the subpoena, so we believe that

there is something in those records that bears on the critical issue

of whether Barack Obama is eligible to serve as President

of the United States.

JUST LIKE WE BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A REASON WHY

THE OBAMA LEGAL TEAM, ACCORDING TO A PUBLISHED

REPORT, HAS BEEN PAID OVER $800,000.00 TO KEEP THE

PUBLIC FROM SEEING HIS REAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE --

NOT THE PHONEY ONE THAT HE PUT UP ON HIS WEBSITE.

There is no doubt in my mind that this e-mail may be the one

of the most important documents that you ever read!

What you do after reading this e-mail may well

determine the fate of the United States of America!

Please know that we are not saying that Barack Hussein Obama

is not eligible to serve as President of the United States of America.

The problem is we just do not know!

We do know that Barack Obama's maternal step-grandmother has

proclaimed that she was present at his birth in Mombasa,

in what is now Kenya, in Africa!

We do know that a fake birth certificate was put up on Obama's website!

We do know that Mr. Obama's legal team is doing everything that it can,

in every case filed over this issue; to make sure that no one has

access to his birth certificate.

We do know that Mr. Obama's legal team is doing everything that it can,

in our California case; to make sure that no one has access to

his college records.

DON'T LET THEM GET AWAY WITH IT!

HELP US EXPOSE THE OBAMA COVER-UPDON'T LET HIM RIP THE CONSTITUTION TO SHREDS!CLICK HERE

The voters of the United States of America have the right to know

whether Barack Obama is a "natural born citizen," as REQUIRED

by the U. S. Constitution!

It's a question that MUST be answered!

Why? Because, if an unqualified person was elected to the Office

of President of the United States,

our entire form of government could be compromised!

Why?

Because, if Barack Hussein Obama is not eligible to serve as

President of the United States, each and every act that he takes

as President will be null and void! That's right, each bill that he

signs into law, every Executive Order that he makes, and

each and every one of his nominations to his Cabinet and

to the federal courts will have no legal effect!

I don't make that statement lightly. It's not an exaggeration.

Article 2, Section 1, Clause 4 of the United States

Constitution provides,

in pertinent part, as follows: "No Person except a natural

born Citizen... shall be eligible to the Office of President..."

That means that neither Osama Bin Laden, nor California Governor

Arnold Schwarzenegger, nor Obama billionaire money man

George Soros can serve as President of the United States.

That also means that if Barack Obama was born outside of

the United States, he is

not eligible to serve as President of our great country!

So where was Mr. Obama born?

He claims to have a copy of his birth certificate. That means that

either he knows where he was born, or he's lying about having

that document.

And only Barack Hussein Obama's ACTUAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE

can answer that question of where he was born. But he has teams

of attorneys, all across the country, spending, and doing, whatever

it takes to make sure that no one, and I mean NO ONE, will be

allowed to see the one document that can clear up this controversy

Mr. Obama has claimed that his Presidential administration will

be the most transparent in history. Yet, he will not make public

the one document that could end all of the questions about the

legitimacy of his election as President.

Why?

Is it because this is some unimportant "technicality"? No, a

requirement of the U. S. Constitution is not a mere "technicality"!

Is it because "President" Obama (if he is the President of the United States)

has more important issues to deal with, and can't spare the time to

deal with such a trivial issue? No, what is more important than the

integrity of the Office of the President?

Or, is there something more involved?

Another question that the Obamaphiles don't want to answer is why,

in 2006, was a law firm with ties to Mr. Obama researching the

question as to how to evade the requirements of Article II of the

United States Constitution, regarding the requirements to serve as

President. 2006? Two years before the Presidential campaign?

If that doesn't raise questions in your mind, then nothing will!

And then there's the statements made by representatives of the

State of Hawaii!

According to Dr. Chiyome Fukino, of the State of Hawaii's

Department of Health,

"Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawaii,

along with

the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory

authority

to oversee

and maintain these type of vital records, have personally

seen and

verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Sen.

Obama's

original birth

certificate on record in accordance with state policies and

procedures."

It is that very record that USJF financed lawsuits in Mississippi and in

Hawaii were seeking to force into the public arena! But Obama's

attorneys, and his allies in state government, stopped those efforts cold!

So, the time of decision is now!

Do we give up?

Do we just ignore this threat to our Constitution? To our very

form of government?

We here at USJF say NO!

Now is not the time to give up this fight!

Now is not the time to walk away from the most important

Constitutional battle in our lifetime!

Now is the time to redouble our efforts to find out the truth!

Now is the time to tell Barack Hussein Obama that the United

States Constitution is more important than his political ambition!

But we can only do this with your help! With your financial support,

and with the financial support of everyone that you know!

HELP US EXPOSE THE OBAMA COVER-UPDON'T LET HIM RIP THE CONSTITUTION TO SHREDS!CLICK HERE